End-of-life notice: American Legal Ethics Library

As of March 1, 2013, the Legal Information Institute is no longer maintaining the information in the American Legal Ethics Library. It is no longer possible for us to maintain it at a level of completeness and accuracy given its staffing needs. It is very possible that we will revive it at a future time. At this point, it is in need of a complete technological renovation and reworking of the "correspondent firm" model which successfully sustained it for many years.

Many people have contributed time and effort to the project over the years, and we would like to thank them. In particular, Roger Cramton and Peter Martin not only conceived ALEL but gave much of their own labor to it. We are also grateful to Brad Wendel for his editorial contributions, to Brian Toohey and all at Jones Day for their efforts, and to all of our correspondents and contributors. Thank you.

We regret any inconvenience.

Some portions of the collection may already be severely out of date, so please be cautious in your use of this material.

ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct
(pre-2002)

[1] This Rule does not prohibit
communication with a represented person, or an employee or agent of such a
person, concerning matters outside the representation. For example, the existence
of a controversy between a government agency and a private party, or between
two organizations, does not prohibit a lawyer for either from communicating
with nonlawyer representatives of the other regarding a separate matter. Also,
parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other and a lawyer
having independent justification or legal authorization for communicating
with a represented person is permitted to do so. Communications authorized
by law include, for example, the right of a party to a controversy with a
government agency to speak with government officials about the matter.

[2] Communications authorized
by law also include constitutionally permissible investigative activities
of lawyers representing governmental entities, directly or through investigative
agents, prior to the commencement of criminal or civil enforcement proceedings,
when there is applicable judicial precedent that either has found the activity
permissible under this Rule or has found this Rule inapplicable. However,
the Rule imposes ethical restrictions that go beyond those imposed by constitutional
provisions.

[3] This rule applies to communications
with any person, whether or not a party to a formal adjudicative proceeding,
contract or negotiation, who is represented by counsel concerning the matter
to which the communication relates.

[4] In the case of an organization,
this Rule prohibits communications by a lawyer for another person or entity
concerning the matter in representation with persons having a managerial responsibility
on behalf of the organization, and with any other person whose act or omission
in connection with that matter may be imputed to the organization for purposes
of civil or criminal liability or whose statement may constitute an admission
on the part of the organization. If an agent or employee of the organization
is represented in the matter by his or her own counsel, the consent by that
counsel to a communication will be sufficient for purposes of this Rule. Compare
Rule 3.4(f).

[5] The prohibition on communications
with a represented person only applies, however, in circumstances where the
lawyer knows that the person is in fact represented in the matter to be discussed.
This means that the lawyer has actual knowledge of the fact of the representation;
but such actual knowledge may be inferred from the circumstances. See Terminology.
Such an inference may arise in circumstances where there is substantial reason
to believe that the person with whom communication is sought is represented
in the matter to be discussed. Thus, a lawyer cannot evade the requirement
of obtaining the consent of counsel by closing eyes to the obvious.

[6] In the event the person
with whom the lawyer communicates is not known to be represented by counsel
in the matter, the lawyer's communications are subject to Rule 4.3.

Model Code Comparison

This Rule is substantially identical to DR 7-104(A)(1)
except for the substitution of the term "person" for "party."